1
U.S. District Court,Eastern District of Pennsylvania Case Number: 08-cv-4083Court of Appeals No. 08-4340
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
_____________
Ο
_____________
PHILIP J. BERG, ESQUIRE,
Plaintiff – Appellant,v.
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, JR., et al,
Respondents – Appellee. _____________
Ο
_____________
APPELLANT’S REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE
_____________________
TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
Please Take Notice that Appellant, Philip J. Berg, Esquire [hereinafter “Appellant”] in
pro se
hereby submits this Request for Judicial Notice of the October 29, 2009 Order of JudgeDavid O. Carter, United States District Court, Central District of California, Southern Division inthe case of
Captain Pamela Barnett, et al v. Obama, et al
, United States District Court, CentralDistrict of California, Southern Division, Case No. 09-cv-0082. Appellant requests this Court to
Case: 08-4340 Document: 00319881357 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/30/2009
2
take Judicial Notice, pursuant to Federal Rules of Evidence 201. The October 29, 2009 Order of Judge David O. Carter is attached hereto as
EXHIBIT “A”
.In particular, Appellant is requesting this Court to take special note of the followingexcerpts:
Page 17, Lines 23-28 and Page 18, Lines 1-4
:“The analysis of redressability and political question is significantlydifferent in the context of a sitting president than it would be for a presidentialcandidate. Therefore, it is a crucial distinction that Plaintiffs’ counsel waited to bring this action until after President Obama’s formal assumption into office.
SeeWilbur v. Locke,
423 F.3d 1101, 1107 (9
th
Cir. 2005) (quoting
Kitty Hawk Aircargo, Inc. v. Chao
, 418 F.3d 453, 460 (5
th
Cir. 2005)) (“As with all questionsof subject matter jurisdiction except mootness, standing is determined as of thedate of the filing of the complaint. . .”).”
Page 24, Lines 21-23
:“There may very well be a legitimate role for the judiciary to interpretwhether the natural born citizen requirement has been satisfied in the case of a presidential candidate who has not already won the election and taken office.”The above is extremely important to Appellant Berg’s case, as the Appellant Berg brought his action questioning the citizenship status and constitutional eligibility of BarrySoetoro a/k/a Barack H. Obama questioning his constitutional eligibility prior to the Democratic National Convention nominating Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack H. Obama as the democratic presidential candidate.
Case: 08-4340 Document: 00319881357 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/30/2009
3
Thus, the Government and the Court in California
conceded the fact Appellant hereinhas “Standing”
and the Court herein in
Berg v. Obama
can intervene, as Appellant Bergbrought his action prior to any election.
The Government’s and the Court’s position agreeswith Appellant herein and disagrees with Mr. Lavelle, Mr. Sandler and Mr. Bauer, Attorney’s for the Democratic National Committee and Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack H. Obama, who are eachfrom Private Law Firms. The Democratic National Committee and Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack H. Obama want this Court to believe Appellant does not have standing and our Courts do nothave jurisdiction, despite the fact
the case was brought before
the Election; Appellant wasdeprived his right to vote for a valid candidate; and the United States Government and another Federal Court concedes Appellant has standing.“A judicially noticed fact must be one not subject to reasonable dispute in that it is either (1) generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court or (2) capable of accurateand ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.”Fed. R. Evid. §201(b);
Easy Sportswear, Inc. v. Am. Econ. Ins. Co
., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS51402 (D. Pa. 2008);
Nationwide Life Ins. Co. v. Commonwealth Land Title Ins. Com
., 2005 U.S.Dist. LEXIS 24479 (E.D. Pa. 2005);
In re NAHC, Inc. Sec Litig
, 306 F.3d 1315 (3d Cir. 2002)“[a] court shall take judicial notice if requested by a party and supplied with the necessaryinformation.” Fed. R. Evid. 201(d);
Easy Sportswear, Inc.
, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 514002 (D.Pa 2008) at *2.It is firmly established that Requests for Judicial Notice are proper “only to the extentthat the noticed facts are relevant to an issue” that is before the Court. The October 29, 2009Order of Judge David O. Carter, a United States District Court Judge in California that Appellantis requesting Judicial Notice of is of the type that have previously been admitted by Judicial
Case: 08-4340 Document: 00319881357 Page: 3 Date Filed: 10/30/2009
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
BERG v OBAMA - Request for Judicial Notice filed by Appellant Philip J. Berg. Certificate of Service dated 10/30/2009. (PJB)Transport Room
OPEN DOCUMENT - Request for Judicial Notice filed by Appellant Philip J. Berg. Certificate of Service dated 10/30/2009. (PJB) - Mr. Berg is requesting the 3rd Circuit take judicial notice of Judge Carter's ruling in Barnett v Obama, particularly with regard to the timing of his underlying case.
1.4K
Reads
0
Readcasts
2
Embed Views
More From This User
Notes
Load more
